continuous emotional (maternal) care from a mother or mother-substitute is necessary for normal emotional and intellectual development
Bowlby believed that mother-love in infancy is 'as important for mental health as are vitamins and proteins for physical health'
separation may lead to maternal deprivation
separation is different from deprivation
separation = means the child not being physically in the presence of the primary attachment figure
deprivation = means losing emotional care as a result of the separation
deprivation can be avoided if alternative emotional care is offered, thus separation doesn't always cause deprivation
critical period = 2 1/2 years
if a child is separated from their mother (without substitute emotional care) for an extended time during the first 21/2 years, then psychological damage is inevitable
continuing risk up to the age of 5
intellectual development = lower IQ
if a child is deprived of maternal care for too long during the critical period this may lead to mental retardation
Goldfarb = found lower IQs in children from institutions compared to foster children
emotional development = affectionless psychopathy
lack of emotional care may also lead to affectionless psychopathy
AP = the inability to experience guilt or strong emotion towards others
this prevents the person developing normal relationships and is associated with criminality
Bowlby 44 thieves study = procedure
sample in study = 44 delinquent teenagers accused of stealing
all 'thieves' were interviewed for signs of AP: characterised by lack of affection, guilt and empathy
families were also interviewed to establish and prolonged separations from mothers
Bowlby 44 thieves study = findings/conclusions
14/44 thieves = could be described as AP
12 of the 14 had experienced prolonged separation from their mothers in the first 2 years of their lives
in contrast = only 5 of the remaining 30 'thieves' had experienced separations
suggests that prolonged early separation/deprivation caused AP
limitation = sources of evidence for maternal deprivation are flawed
44 thieves study is flawed because it was open to bias = Bowlby himself assessed both deprivation and psychopathy, knowing what he hoped to find
Goldfarb's study of wartime orphans = flawed because he used traumatised participants who lacked good aftercare (this introduced confounding variables)
=> means that Bowlby originally had no solid evidence on which to base his theory of maternal deprivation
Counterpoint to flawed evidence
Some evidence from newer studies to support the theory of maternal deprivation
Eg = Levy et al = found that separating baby rats for one day had permanent effect on their social development
Means that there is now some evidence for the theory of maternal deprivation after all
limitation = Bowlby confused deprivation and privation
Rutter = made the distinction between deprivation (separation from an attachment figure) and privation (failure to form an attachment)
Privation has more serious effects
The children Bowlby studied (eg the 44 thieves) and others he based his ideas on (eg Goldfarb’s wartime orphans) may have been prived rather than deprived
Means that Bowlby probably exaggerated the effects of deprivation on development
limitation = critical period is more of a sensitive period
Koluchova = conducted a case study on Czech twin boys isolated from age 18 months (locked in a cupboard)
Later they were looked after by two loving adults and appeared to recover fully
Shows that severe deprivation can have positive outcomes provided the child has some social interaction and good aftercare
Means that the period identified by Bowlby may be a ‘sensitive’ one but it cannot be critical
extra evaluation = conflicting evidence
Replications of Bowlby’s 44 thieves study (eg Lewis) have generally failed to reproduce his findings on psychopathy
BUT = some more recent research (eg Gao et al) has found links between poor maternal care and adult psychopathy
Means the link between maternal deprivation and psychopathy are unclear